Same result, different route: How Brazil handles supporter misconduct compared to UEFA

The recent analysis on LawInSport^[1] of the two Real Madrid awards, CAS 2025/A/11261 (the Chant Award)^[2] and CAS 2025/A/11723 (the Salute Award)^[3], set out clearly how strict liability operates under Article 14 of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations: liability arises regardless of fault, scale or venue, and prevention, internal enforcement and clean records bear only on sanction. Those principles are settled in European football and, as the authors noted, mirror the FIFA Disciplinary Code 2026 applied at the FIFA World Cup 26.

Brazil offers an instructive counterpoint. It is a footballing nation of more than 200 million people,^[4] with a dedicated system of constitutionally recognised sports tribunals, a specific statute on supporter rights, and, since 2025, mandatory biometric identification of spectators in all sports venues with a capacity above 20,000, a General Sports Law rule that applies to sport generally and not only to football^[5]. Brazilian sports justice often reaches the same results as the UEFA model, but by a different doctrinal route and with two significant departures: proof of preventive measures can sometimes exclude liability, not merely mitigate the sanction; and the territorial reach of club responsibility has just been narrowed by the Superior Tribunal of Sports Justice (Superior Tribunal de Justiça Desportiva, STJD) in a case arising from a fatality.

Article Overview

This article examines:

• The dual architecture of Brazilian responsibility for supporter misconduct: sports disciplinary and civil liability.
• Article 213 of the Brazilian Code of Sports Justice: an omission-based offence applied as strict liability.
• Discrimination under Article 243-G: why the number of supporters involved changes everything.
• Prevention as mitigation and as defence: the 2025 enunciations of the Federal Justice Council.
• The territorial turn: from the Fortaleza team bus (2024) to the Maracanã surroundings (2026).
• Civil liability: where the sports tribunal stops, the civil courts continue.
• Biometric identification and the future of strict liability.
• Practical takeaways for clubs and practitioners.